Algebraic immunity for cryptographically significant Boolean functions: analysis and construction
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, algebraic attacks have received a lot of attention in the cryptographic literature. It has been observed that a Boolean function f used as a cryptographic primitive, and interpreted as a multivariate polynomial over F/sub 2/, should not have low degree multiples obtained by multiplication with low degree nonzero functions. In this paper, we show that a Boolean function having low nonlinearity is (also) weak against algebraic attacks, and we extend this result to higher order nonlinearities. Next, we present enumeration results on linearly independent annihilators. We also study certain classes of highly nonlinear resilient Boolean functions for their algebraic immunity. We identify that functions having low-degree subfunctions are weak in terms of algebraic immunity, and we analyze some existing constructions from this viewpoint. Further, we present a construction method to generate Boolean functions on n variables with highest possible algebraic immunity /spl lceil/n/2/spl rceil/ (this construction, first presented at the 2005 Workshop on Fast Software Encryption (FSE 2005), has been the first one producing such functions). These functions are obtained through a doubly indexed recursive relation. We calculate their Hamming weights and deduce their nonlinearities; we show that they have very high algebraic degrees. We express them as the sums of two functions which can be obtained from simple symmetric functions by a transformation which can be implemented with an algorithm whose complexity is linear in the number of variables. We deduce a very fast way of computing the output to these functions, given their input.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it